The Memphis appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1886-1890, 1887-04-28
A PROHIBITIONIST
GREATLY CONCERNED LEST A
HIGH LICENSE
Shall Prevent the Poor MAN From
Getting rs Drunk as n Lord
A Strong Point.
To the Editors Of the Appeal:

To the Editors Of the Appeal:
In your Sundays issue l find IAN
Answer to the Women's Christian
Temperance Union" stating clearly
certain things and implying certain
others. You arrav the APPEAL tquare-
ly sgaiDst the prohibition amendment
and refuse any pledge to admit contri-
buttons in favor thereof, any promise
OF special privileges to the women in
prohibilion's behalf. You declare
that your paper "cannot become the
organ Of any creed or organization
With eighteen years of editorial ex-
perience behind me, l must commend
your editorial policy in certain re.
spects. The wise editor will hold his
journal as independent as you pro-
claim yours, and in it will indeed re.
fleet "all shades OF opinion upon all
questions affecting tho public" He
will edit his own columns, and for
them be edit Jrially responsible. But
II he be wise indeed will he oppose a
movement for socisty's behoof on the
plea that he does not bslieve il an ade-
quate remedy without he knows and
can point out a remtdy Adequate2 Or
will he condemn what he believes in.
adeQuats on the ground OF a principle
in 1t to which he objects, when the
remedy he himself proposes is ade-
qusts only as 1t embodies the very
principle which he condemns2
Has the APPEAL presented any rem
edy for the evils of the liquor traffic
other than high license2
Gan high license be effective in cur.
ing ihese evils in any other way than
through application Of the prohibitory
principleH
Can the prohibition principle be
applied otherwise than by arbitrary
powsrf"
When you condemn arbitrary
power" behind the prohibition amend
ment, do you not strike at the only
force which can make high license .ei-
fecive2
Is not that arbitrary power" which
discriminstes between citizens, licens.
ing the rich man and prohibiting the
poor man, the worst possible form OF
such power aud the most to be con.
demnedf
II prohibition be 'sump.uary," are
not the prohibition features OF high
license law alec "sumptuary," aud is
not that the most Objectionable sump-
tuary law possible. in free country
which strikes at the poor man and
grants monopoly TO the r!chf
III poor laborers are oppressed by
their employers and not permitted to
enrich themselves by honest industry,
ought any law TO stand between them
aud any industry to which the rich
employer has entrance and in which
ne may engsgeH
Ought law ever to allow rich or poor
% engage in any industry which is not
honest aud In which honest poverty
may not have equal chance with Ton.
eat capital. 80 far as wise endeavor Is
concerned9
II popular education for good Is de.
and governmental aid thereof
IS proper, is popular education for i'll
also wise, and should governmental
of il be maintainedY
Does the saloon system educate, and
II 80, is it for good or il2 II for III,
should the government aid it by
license aud protectionP II for good,
why not have more Federal aid for
the good thiDg2
These, Mr.. Editor, are only few
quest ons, euggestt d by your Sunday
editorial, which l would much like to
have answered You will scarcely
degy au old urnslist the courtesy Of
full replies, Respectfully yours,
A. A. HOPKINS.
The APPEAL has endeavored for
years, for as many years rs prohibit
ton has been mooted question, to
make itself clearly understood upon
that question, and it cannot afford
eitker to repeat IFS position or indulge
Mr.. Hopkins In the controversy he
invites, The APPEAL speaks plainly
and clearly and If MIR. Hopkins shall
continue to read 1t carefully he will
not loag find himself in doubt az to
the points he questions us upon.-ED.
APPEAL